PerformanceRiskValuationProfitabilityCashflowLiquidityESGRevenue & Geographic ExposureForecastFinancial GrowthIncome GrowthCashflow GrowthBalance Sheet Growth
Wheaton Precious Metals Corp. (WPM)
96.701.20 (1.26%)
95.23 - 97.14
55.47 - 103.81
1.63M / 1.80M (Avg.)
55.57 | 1.74
Steady, sustainable growth is a hallmark of high-quality businesses. Value investors watch these metrics to confirm that the company's fundamental performance aligns with—or outpaces—its current market valuation.
10.84%
Positive revenue growth while FNV is negative. John Neff might see a notable competitive edge here.
-5.28%
Both firms have negative gross profit growth. Martin Whitman would question the sector’s viability or cyclical slump.
-0.35%
Both companies show negative EBIT growth. Martin Whitman would consider macro or sector-specific headwinds.
-0.35%
Both companies face negative operating income growth. Martin Whitman would suspect broader market or cost hurdles.
-86.91%
Both companies face declining net income. Martin Whitman would suspect external pressures or flawed business models in the space.
-86.84%
Both companies exhibit negative EPS growth. Martin Whitman would consider sector-wide issues or an unsustainable business environment.
-86.84%
Both face negative diluted EPS growth. Martin Whitman would suspect an industry or cyclical slump with heightened share issuance across the board.
0.19%
Slight or no buybacks while FNV is reducing shares. John Neff might see a missed opportunity if the company’s stock is cheap.
0.01%
Slight or no buyback while FNV is reducing diluted shares. John Neff might consider the competitor’s approach more shareholder-friendly.
17.11%
Dividend growth above 1.5x FNV's 4.38%. David Dodd would verify if the firm's cash flow is robust enough for these payouts.
8.12%
Positive OCF growth while FNV is negative. John Neff would see this as a clear operational advantage vs. the competitor.
127.02%
Positive FCF growth while FNV is negative. John Neff would see a strong competitive edge in net cash generation.
196.24%
10Y revenue/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 109.05%. David Dodd would confirm if management’s strategic vision consistently outperforms the competitor.
7.88%
Positive 5Y CAGR while FNV is negative. John Neff might see an underappreciated edge for the firm vs. the competitor.
24.99%
3Y revenue/share CAGR at 75-90% of FNV's 30.13%. Bill Ackman would expect new product strategies to close the gap.
192.99%
10Y OCF/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 105.29%. David Dodd would check if a superior product mix or cost edge drives this outperformance.
-14.53%
Negative 5Y OCF/share CAGR while FNV is at 10.69%. Joel Greenblatt would question the firm’s operational model or cost structure.
13.51%
3Y OCF/share CAGR under 50% of FNV's 149.12%. Michael Burry would worry about a significant short-term disadvantage in generating operational cash.
-77.12%
Both face negative decade-long net income/share CAGR. Martin Whitman would suspect a shrinking or highly disrupted sector.
-93.99%
Negative 5Y net income/share CAGR while FNV is 96.80%. Joel Greenblatt would see fundamental missteps limiting profitability vs. the competitor.
-90.63%
Negative 3Y CAGR while FNV is 95.32%. Joel Greenblatt might call for a short-term turnaround strategy or cost realignment.
285.20%
10Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 65.40%. David Dodd would confirm if consistent earnings retention or fewer write-downs drive this advantage.
49.04%
5Y equity/share CAGR above 1.5x FNV's 9.73%. David Dodd might see stronger earnings retention or fewer asset impairments fueling growth.
18.79%
3Y equity/share CAGR similar to FNV's 17.23%. Walter Schloss sees both having parallel profitability or reinvestment over 3 years.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-42.97%
Negative 5Y dividend/share CAGR while FNV stands at 49.51%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker commitment to dividends vs. a competitor that might be growing them.
-42.97%
Negative near-term dividend growth while FNV invests at 9.00%. Joel Greenblatt sees a weaker short-term distribution policy unless justified by strategic spending.
-20.14%
Both reduce receivables yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a shift in the entire niche’s credit approach or softer demand.
-100.00%
Both reduce inventory yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader move to lean operations or industry slowdown in demand.
-2.73%
Both reduce assets yoy. Martin Whitman suspects a broader sector retraction or post-boom asset trimming cycle.
-0.66%
We have a declining book value while FNV shows 0.65%. Joel Greenblatt sees a fundamental disadvantage in net worth creation vs. the competitor.
-11.30%
We’re deleveraging while FNV stands at 0.00%. Joel Greenblatt considers if we gain a balance-sheet advantage for potential downturns.
No Data
No Data available this quarter, please select a different quarter.
-60.99%
We cut SG&A while FNV invests at 52.63%. Joel Greenblatt sees a short-term margin benefit but wonders if the competitor invests for future gains.